Did Nissan Kill the SFA for Toyota???

[wesel123]

I know this may sound weird but did Nissan pushing the IFS front ends on the early 80 pickup's (not 84 and on Hardbodies) kill the Toyota SFA????? My thought is that Nissan being Toyota's biggest competitor at the time, were following suit and going with a "new" technology. In other words did Toyota start the process of eliminating the SFA for the American market to keep up with Nissan???

Thoughts

 

[Klierslc]

Land Cruisers had SFA until 98 in the US market, till 06 or so for the 105 series. I think that the on road advantages of the IFS are what made toyota switch over. For the vast majority of users, IFS is better anyway.....

 

[spressomon]

Can't discount GM and Ford's move to IFS as a competitive measure for Toyota to answer to either here in the USA.

And as above, IFS is better for a majority of the USA SUV market and the people who buy them. We (solid front axle customers) are an infinitesimally small % of their market consideration (if any at all ;-) here in the USA.

 

[Life_in_4Lo]

I think, in general, the move towards IFS (for trucks) followed the more car-like considerations of the market.
Especially on small trucks that (at least in the USA) do not carry much weight.

SFA is only king where it it's strength outweighs street comfort. Like 3/4 and 1 ton trucks.

That and props to Jeep for keeping the faith... though they really need to beef up the axles, at least on the Rubicon if not across the line.

 

[Martinjmpr]

The first 4x4 mini truck on the US market was IFS (Chevy LUV, A/K/A Isuzu Pickup, introduced about 6 months before the Toyota 4x4 pickup.)

I think it was more the case that Toyota stuck with SFA because they had so many other SFA platforms at the time (FJ40, FJ60, FJ62, etc) that they stuck with what they knew. The other manufacturers, starting with a "clean slate", introduced IFS from the get-go. Note that the Mistubishi Montero (introduced to the US in 1983) and the Isuzu Trooper (introduced to the US market in 1984) were both IFS designs.

 

[adrenaline503]

Dont forget that Nissan kept the SFA overseas for years, and still offers a few models today. I believe as its been said, the assuption was that American buyers wanted a more comfortable ride at the expense of the benefits of a SFA. They were probally right.

 

[jpvm]

Don't really know the exact reasons but my 2000 Nissan Patrol GU with factory SFA and coil springs all over really drives wonderful and its ride on highway and bad roads is a dream. Still you may buy a 2010 Nissan Patrol in many lands and drive the dream. Sadly the US never got to take a test ride on these fine drives.

 

[Co-opski]

Paging RMP&O to the white courtesy phone.

 

[ShottsCruisers]

For those shopping for a NEW vehicle in almost every major worldwide market, the SFA is not sufficient to sell vehicles any longer. The ride and handling improvments of IFS are huge compared to the old designs.

Imagine the typical NEW SUV buyer shopping dealers in, ohhh, Los Angeles for example.

Escalade = Nice, powerful, roomy
Navigator = Nice, powerful, roomy
Land Cruiser (if it has the 100's V8 but the 80's suspension/frame) = Nice, roomy, ride and handling sucks. Doesn't equal the Caddy or Lincoln.

Who will get the sale? Not Toyota often. Demand and laws drive designs. SFA is dead except for limited certain applications where a NEW buyer will demand it (HD Pickup, Wrangler buyer...you notice other Jeep models are IFS).

The makers don't build NEW vehicles for folks like us (wheelers who want to four-wheel them and pick them up used for cheap). Remember, at one point it was reported the URJ200 might be IRS. Then later we heard the LX570 would by IRS...different from the Toyota version due to an even more demanding buyer. SFA is gone like the carburetor.

 

[Life_in_4Lo]

jvpm
I love those Patrols! A friend of a friend in Venezuela owns one like yours.

I love them because they look like the perfect mix of a 80 series and 100 series Land Cruiser.
I understand the Patrols are even beefier than 80 series Land Cruisers too.

Very nice setup you have!

The reason there is no market in the USA for the Patrol - you only have to look at what Nissan is selling here. The Armada and QX. Americans want big, full interiors with large 3rd row seating and lots of horsepower.

You can see what Toyota develops for USA specific SUV's= Sequoia, Highlander.

 

[ShottsCruisers]

did Nissan kill the Toyota SFA

No. New technology and new vehicle buyer demands did. If you want to sell NEW cars you need to be competitive.

 

[lowenbrau]

SFA isn't exactly dead for Toyota. The Cruiser 70 series is still made with it.

There is no advantage to a live axle over IFS for the new car buying public. Nobody rock crawls a brand new truck and a solid axle swap is relatively minor to those of us who buy trucks used to modify them.

If you ever find somebody without a bias who has to drive a full sized truck for work on gravel they'll tell you an IFS Chevy handles a lot better than a live axle Dodge or Ford.

 

[ntsqd]

I have a bias towards LA, but no way would I cut off an IFS for any use except an extreme rock crawler. I've chased enough of them around the desert to understand the LA's limitations.

I'm not knocking Nissan's product in the least, but they've never been much of a contender in the U.S. 4wd market. I don't understand why.

 

[wesel123]

Valid points on the US market thought. Didn't really think of it that way.

 

[alexrex20]

I'm not knocking Nissan's product in the least, but they've never been much of a contender in the U.S. 4wd market. I don't understand why.

in the 60s, toyota and nissan reached an agreement. nissan would discontinue Patrol sales in the USA, so that toyota could have that entire market with the FJ. in turn, toyota axed their US-bound little sports car, so that nissan could keep their Z car.

so, we ended up with the Z (and what a great market it has been for nissan), but we've been shortchanged on the Patrol ever since.